AHC: A 20th and 21st century national self-determination-wank but with much less suffering

[WolfBear]

How do you realistically get a 20th and 21st century national self-determination-wank (similar to real life) but with much less suffering involved? Also, bonus points if you can realistically make this scenario a monarchy-screw as well, as in real life. Again, the less suffering, the better. In real life, the 20th century was unfortunately extremely notorious for its suffering: WWI, WWII, Nazism, Communism, the Holocaust, et cetera. I want to avoid as much as possible of that in this scenario while still realistically having as much of a national self-determination-wank and, if possible, monarchy-screw as possible.

Thoughts on how to realistically get this done?

 

[sillygoose]

How do you realistically get a 20th and 21st century national self-determination-wank (similar to real life) but with much less suffering involved? Also, bonus points if you can realistically make this scenario a monarchy-screw as well, as in real life. Again, the less suffering, the better. In real life, the 20th century was unfortunately extremely notorious for its suffering: WWI, WWII, Nazism, Communism, the Holocaust, et cetera. I want to avoid as much as possible of that in this scenario while still realistically having as much of a national self-determination-wank and, if possible, monarchy-screw as possible.

Thoughts on how to realistically get this done?

Pretty hard to achieve given that the ruling class before the world wars was not going to change the existing system without a fight. A series of really brutal ones at that going by OTL.

 

[WolfBear]

Pretty hard to achieve given that the ruling class before the world wars was not going to change the existing system without a fight. A series of really brutal ones at that going by OTL.

You could still have some suffering in this TL just so long as it's significantly less than in our TL if that's what's necessary for this AHC to actually work.

 

[Skallagrim]

Minimal bloodshed means you need o avoid the violent break-up of the various empires (either due to wars or due to revolutions).

As such, the obvious way to go is to have several empires implement systems of "sovereignty within the empire".

 

[WolfBear]

Minimal bloodshed means you need o avoid the violent break-up of the various empires (either due to wars or due to revolutions).

As such, the obvious way to go is to have several empires implement systems of "sovereignty within the empire".

You mean similar to what the Soviet Union had?

 

[WolfBear]

@Skallagrim Also, what about for countries such as Austria-Hungary? To implement plans like this one? :

United States of Greater Austria - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And then hope for an eventual, mostly peaceful Soviet-style collapse sometime down the line?

 

[Skallagrim]

You mean similar to what the Soviet Union had?

Conidering that the USSR had a gazillion rights and guarantees on paper, and absolutely none in practice, it's safe to say that when I recommend something, I never mean something similar to what they had...

@Skallagrim Also, what about for countries such as Austria-Hungary? To implement plans like this one?

Something much more like this proposal would be far more workable. It would take a lot of tension away, thus weakening the cause of dedicated (willing-to-use-force) separatists. At the same time, it gives the peoples involved enormous control over their own affairs, while preserving the advantages (e.g. shared market, military union, common diplomatic negotiating position) that inclusion within the empire provides.

Note that the map of the proposal reveals that even the proposed internal borders -- while better than what the professional morons carved out post-war in OTL -- are still far from perfect. Therefore, I'd say there are two more considerations if you want to keep violence and other unpleasantries to a minimum:

1) Refine the borders a bit more, using municipality-level census information (and, where doubt persists, a municipal pleibiscite) to make sure the borders reflect the situation on the ground as accurately as possible. If it's all within the same empire anyway, it's not a problem if this produces fairly jagged, HRE-like internal borders.

2) Since people of all ethnicities live all over the empire, you need to give all people who live outside "their own" ethnic homeland a choice: you must register to vote in your own homeland, or in the region where you live. Either is fine, but you only get to have one voice, and you may choose where to have it heard. So even if you're a Czech living in Vienna, you can still choose to be politically part of the Czech ethnic community, and vote in Czech elections. But this means you don't get to vote in Viennese elections. And conversely, you can vote in Viennese elections if you want, but then you don't get to vote in Czech elections.

...It may be note that the Ottoman Empire was divided into villayets, but at the same time registered its inhabitants by ethnicity/religion. So that empire, too, is actually well set-up for the sort of system I've just decribed. I think that if this were to be done, both the Austro-Hungarian and the Ottoman empire would have been able to thrive.

And then hope for an eventual, mostly peaceful Soviet-style collapse sometime down the line?

Why would I hope for that? Even a peaceful collapse is a mess. If you want to reduce suffering, you should strive to keep the empires together. I get that your OP asks for a monarchy-screw, but this is inherently at odds with the premise of less suffering. The collapse of the monarchies caused a vacuüm of power and legitimacy, and that caused major problems.

If we weigh the benefits of maximised independence versus the benefits of minimised turmoil and suffering, there is little doubt that "highly decentralised multi-ethnic empire" is the best conclusion we may hope for. Even a peaceful split is going to suck for all those Czechs living in Vienna, or the Germans in Hungary, etc. etc.

 

[sillygoose]

@Skallagrim Also, what about for countries such as Austria-Hungary? To implement plans like this one? :

United States of Greater Austria - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And then hope for an eventual, mostly peaceful Soviet-style collapse sometime down the line?

That was never a real plan. It was a proposal from a hanger-on of FF, which no one took seriously. FF looked into the Triune kingdom idea and realized it would just be like the problems of the Dual Monarchy, but even worse. This is the same concept, but making it even more diffuse and difficult to get anyone to work together, since all the different nationalities had a ruling class more interested in their narrow class interests and personal power than in getting the system to continue to function.

 

[Skallagrim]

That was never a real plan. It was a proposal from a hanger-on of FF, which no one took seriously. FF looked into the Triune kingdom idea and realized it would just be like the problems of the Dual Monarchy, but even worse. This is the same concept, but making it even more diffuse and difficult to get anyone to work together, since all the different nationalities had a ruling class more interested in their narrow class interests and personal power than in getting the system to continue to function.

"It's not something I like" and "It's not likely to be implemented" is not the same as "It's not a plan".

Obviously, it's a real plan, worked out in reasonable detail. Franz Ferdinand certainly liked it, and much preferred it over the Triune Kingdom proposal, because this actually aimed to achieve what he thought desirable.

Personally, I'd rate the chances of implementation very low, but if implemented, I think it would work very well. You point to elite interests, but their self-interest is precisely why it would work. If implemented, this system would mean that breaking down the empire would make things worse for them.

The ones getting screwed over here are the Hungarians, really. And considering that they're the big obstacle to all reform, that's precisely the idea -- and precisely why Franz Ferdinand wanted it to happen.

 

[WolfBear]

That was never a real plan. It was a proposal from a hanger-on of FF, which no one took seriously. FF looked into the Triune kingdom idea and realized it would just be like the problems of the Dual Monarchy, but even worse. This is the same concept, but making it even more diffuse and difficult to get anyone to work together, since all the different nationalities had a ruling class more interested in their narrow class interests and personal power than in getting the system to continue to function.

Karl or his son Otto might theoretically implement this plan after FF's death if FF doesn't alter the A-H line of succession in the meantime.

 

[Atarlost]

To add to this, the large single ethnicity nations are a threat to their small neighbors in any balkanized Europe scenario. France is pretty monolithic. Russia has some bits that would want out in your scenario, but until the holodomor the Ukrainians think of themselves as Russians so that's still a big nation. These nations are in a position to carve up any petty little ethnostate that is stupid enough to vote itself out of the protection of an empire unless some multi-ethnic empire that voted to stay together out of fear of France and Russia gobbles them up first in the name of strategic depth.

A stable Europe or world requires a balance of power and that is incompatible with tidy ethnostates unless you first commit genocide on the larger ethnicities to bring them into balance and mass relocations to get people into defensible borders. And even if you did have a balance of many small nations the more you have the greater the chance that one can find an advantage that will allow it to snowball before a coalition can form that can stop it.

 

[WolfBear]

To add to this, the large single ethnicity nations are a threat to their small neighbors in any balkanized Europe scenario. France is pretty monolithic. Russia has some bits that would want out in your scenario, but until the holodomor the Ukrainians think of themselves as Russians so that's still a big nation. These nations are in a position to carve up any petty little ethnostate that is stupid enough to vote itself out of the protection of an empire unless some multi-ethnic empire that voted to stay together out of fear of France and Russia gobbles them up first in the name of strategic depth.

A stable Europe or world requires a balance of power and that is incompatible with tidy ethnostates unless you first commit genocide on the larger ethnicities to bring them into balance and mass relocations to get people into defensible borders. And even if you did have a balance of many small nations the more you have the greater the chance that one can find an advantage that will allow it to snowball before a coalition can form that can stop it.

Yeah, the reason that the current arrangement has worked so well for Europe is because the US acts as a guarantor of Europe's security through NATO. Some other extremely powerful Great Powers would likewise need to do this in this TL in place of the US for this to actually work in this TL.

 

[sillygoose]

"It's not something I like" and "It's not likely to be implemented" is not the same as "It's not a plan".

Obviously, it's a real plan, worked out in reasonable detail.

By that metric whatever some wacko plans out in his basement is also a real plan, but that doesn't mean it has a remote chance of being implemented.

Franz Ferdinand certainly liked it, and much preferred it over the Triune Kingdom proposal, because this actually aimed to achieve what he thought desirable.

He did not. Wikipedia is incorrect about that, which is why there is no citations supporting that claim.
This book shows what his actual plans were based on papers found in his desk after his assassination:

Personally, I'd rate the chances of implementation very low, but if implemented, I think it would work very well. You point to elite interests, but their self-interest is precisely why it would work. If implemented, this system would mean that breaking down the empire would make things worse for them.

How do you figure that? IOTL many were trying to blow up the empire. Like the Hungarian nobility who ran the Hungarian parliament. They just wanted a common monarch, but an independent country.

The ones getting screwed over here are the Hungarians, really. And considering that they're the big obstacle to all reform, that's precisely the idea -- and precisely why Franz Ferdinand wanted it to happen.

FF's actual plan was to force changes during the next Ausgleich to broaden the voter base in Hungary to break the lock the nobility had on voting, as only 5% of the population could even vote based on land ownership requirements.

 

[WolfBear]

By that metric whatever some wacko plans out in his basement is also a real plan, but that doesn't mean it has a remote chance of being implemented.


He did not. Wikipedia is incorrect about that, which is why there is no citations supporting that claim.
This book shows what his actual plans were based on papers found in his desk after his assassination:



How do you figure that? IOTL many were trying to blow up the empire. Like the Hungarian nobility who ran the Hungarian parliament. They just wanted a common monarch, but an independent country.


FF's actual plan was to force changes during the next Ausgleich to broaden the voter base in Hungary to break the lock the nobility had on voting, as only 5% of the population could even vote based on land ownership requirements.

How likely do you think that Kaiser Bill would have been to support FF's reform projects/plans in A-H had FF lived?

 

[sillygoose]

Karl or his son Otto might theoretically implement this plan after FF's death if FF doesn't alter the A-H line of succession in the meantime.

No way in hell, no one was interested in changing a thing for fear of a civil war. FF was the only one willing to risk the civil war to make the changes.

 

[sillygoose]

How likely do you think that Kaiser Bill would have been to support FF's reform projects/plans in A-H had FF lived?

He'd have backed FF if anyone tried to intervene in domestic A-H matters, but IMHO Bill would be hands off given that it was an internal matter. Off the record he'd likely support it since if successful FF would have a much more loyal Hungary and more army spending, which takes pressure off of Germany as the army had felt it was maxed out in the number of divisions it could generate for a war.

 

[WolfBear]

No way in hell, no one was interested in changing a thing for fear of a civil war. FF was the only one willing to risk the civil war to make the changes.

But once the civil war will happen, then future changes should be easier assuming A-H emerges from this civil war in one piece, no?

 

[sillygoose]

But once the civil war will happen, then future changes should be easier assuming A-H emerges from this civil war in one piece, no?

Yes. I have an excellent book about Austro-Hungarian artillery from the Vienna military museum that discusses all the goodies the A-H army (the joint army) was going to buy as soon as they could get funding. Besides retiring their bronze barreled 19th century guns still in service they were going to dramatically beef up division and corps artillery to levels that would surpass any army in the world and would give them a major firepower advantage over the Russians to make up for fewer number of divisions/corps/armies as well as be a deterrent to Italy and Serbia who couldn't afford anywhere near that many guns. The only thing holding that back (including major expansion of the combined army) was Hungarian approval for funding to expand the army and modernize it.

 

[WolfBear]

Yes. I have an excellent book about Austro-Hungarian artillery from the Vienna military museum that discusses all the goodies the A-H army (the joint army) was going to buy as soon as they could get funding. Besides retiring their bronze barreled 19th century guns still in service they were going to dramatically beef up division and corps artillery to levels that would surpass any army in the world and would give them a major firepower advantage over the Russians to make up for fewer number of divisions/corps/armies as well as be a deterrent to Italy and Serbia who couldn't afford anywhere near that many guns. The only thing holding that back (including major expansion of the combined army) was Hungarian approval for funding to expand the army and modernize it.

Interestingly enough, I read in one article that Franz Ferdinand wanted to turn Hungary into a simple crown land; it might have been in this article:

Influence, Power, and the Policy Process: The Case of Franz Ferdinand, 1906-1914 on JSTOR

Samuel R. Williamson, Jr., Influence, Power, and the Policy Process: The Case of Franz Ferdinand, 1906-1914, The Historical Journal, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Jun., 1974), pp. 417-434

www.jstor.org

You can get its full text on LibGen for free if you want to.

 

[WolfBear]

"It's not something I like" and "It's not likely to be implemented" is not the same as "It's not a plan".

Obviously, it's a real plan, worked out in reasonable detail. Franz Ferdinand certainly liked it, and much preferred it over the Triune Kingdom proposal, because this actually aimed to achieve what he thought desirable.

Personally, I'd rate the chances of implementation very low, but if implemented, I think it would work very well. You point to elite interests, but their self-interest is precisely why it would work. If implemented, this system would mean that breaking down the empire would make things worse for them.

The ones getting screwed over here are the Hungarians, really. And considering that they're the big obstacle to all reform, that's precisely the idea -- and precisely why Franz Ferdinand wanted it to happen.

AFAIK, it was a proposal offered to Franz Ferdinand by one of his advisers. This doesn't necessarily mean that he actually personally agreed with it.

Conidering that the USSR had a gazillion rights and guarantees on paper, and absolutely none in practice, it's safe to say that when I recommend something, I never mean something similar to what they had...


Something much more like this proposal would be far more workable. It would take a lot of tension away, thus weakening the cause of dedicated (willing-to-use-force) separatists. At the same time, it gives the peoples involved enormous control over their own affairs, while preserving the advantages (e.g. shared market, military union, common diplomatic negotiating position) that inclusion within the empire provides.

Note that the map of the proposal reveals that even the proposed internal borders -- while better than what the professional morons carved out post-war in OTL -- are still far from perfect. Therefore, I'd say there are two more considerations if you want to keep violence and other unpleasantries to a minimum:

1) Refine the borders a bit more, using municipality-level census information (and, where doubt persists, a municipal pleibiscite) to make sure the borders reflect the situation on the ground as accurately as possible. If it's all within the same empire anyway, it's not a problem if this produces fairly jagged, HRE-like internal borders.

2) Since people of all ethnicities live all over the empire, you need to give all people who live outside "their own" ethnic homeland a choice: you must register to vote in your own homeland, or in the region where you live. Either is fine, but you only get to have one voice, and you may choose where to have it heard. So even if you're a Czech living in Vienna, you can still choose to be politically part of the Czech ethnic community, and vote in Czech elections. But this means you don't get to vote in Viennese elections. And conversely, you can vote in Viennese elections if you want, but then you don't get to vote in Czech elections.

...It may be note that the Ottoman Empire was divided into villayets, but at the same time registered its inhabitants by ethnicity/religion. So that empire, too, is actually well set-up for the sort of system I've just decribed. I think that if this were to be done, both the Austro-Hungarian and the Ottoman empire would have been able to thrive.


Why would I hope for that? Even a peaceful collapse is a mess. If you want to reduce suffering, you should strive to keep the empires together. I get that your OP asks for a monarchy-screw, but this is inherently at odds with the premise of less suffering. The collapse of the monarchies caused a vacuüm of power and legitimacy, and that caused major problems.

If we weigh the benefits of maximised independence versus the benefits of minimised turmoil and suffering, there is little doubt that "highly decentralised multi-ethnic empire" is the best conclusion we may hope for. Even a peaceful split is going to suck for all those Czechs living in Vienna, or the Germans in Hungary, etc. etc.

Gotcha!

1. TBH, I'm not a fan of overly jagged borders, even within a country.

2. Makes perfect sense. If you're a Czech in Vienna, you vote absentee in Czech elections!

Are you sure that a peaceful collapse would actually be a mess? The USSR's collapse was mostly peaceful in our TL, after all.

Also, interestingly enough, Italy's monarchy collapsed without any bloodshed during this event itself--though with some blooshed beforehand in the form of WWII and the Holocaust.

BTW, as a side note, I still want France to lose Algeria in this TL or at least downgrade Algeria to a protectorate since I want to keep France solidly majority-European in this TL.